Hamilton Hamilton Line B LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

It'll be an interesting discussion that will probably continue well into the 2020s when we debate where the next kilometer of Hamilton LRT should be most efficiently built.

While I believe B-Line is the ideal "starter LRT" for Hamilton due to the downtown, Mac, and GO stations, I agree now is not the time for a full-length A-Line and we might want to concentrate on a different route first. But that discussion feels half a generation away -- literally.

A-Line might not be useless by the 2040s -- By the 2030s, the demographics of the A-Line may have changed -- a full two decades from now. It's wholly possible the go-ahead occurs in the early 2030s, which means we might not have a fully-built A-Line until the early 2040s -- and only a few years later is the 2050s -- the middle of the century! By then, Hamilton Airport is a much more buzzing 'relief' airport for the GTHA, and medium-density and condo developments replace Walmart parking lots. That's almost a 1920s into 1960s jump -- from no TVs and mainly Model Ts, all the way to jet airplanes and the interstate freeway system.
 
DC83 said:
The A-Line is useless in it's current form.

I've taken the A-Line Express Bus many times, and it's usually 7/8 empty for 3/4 of the route (specifically between Rymal & Fennell/Mohawk College). The bus usually fills up between Mohawk College to TH&B GO.
Click to expand...
Mind you, this is without GO service to West harbour. This will change with GO ridership.

DC83 said:
Either way, again IMO, the second LRT line built in Hamilton should actually be the 'C' Line along Mohawk Rd between Ancaster Meadowlands to Mohawk Sports Park @ Mountain Brow -- with an eventual extension to Upper Centennial via Mud St.
.
Click to expand...

This is known as the T-Line. Metrolinx has it within their 25 year timeframe, less priority than the B and A-Lines (15-year).
 
WislaHD said:
Now that I am thinking it, why doesn't the A Line stub just extend south of the B line to Hamilton GO?
Click to expand...
Presumably they wanted to provide service to the new West Harbour GO station, as well as supporting James Street North, which seems to be (correct me if I'm wrong) the prime redevelopment corridor in Hamilton.
 
DonValleyRainbow said:
Mind you, this is without GO service to West harbour. This will change with GO ridership.



This is known as the T-Line. Metrolinx has it within their 25 year timeframe, less priority than the B and A-Lines (15-year).
Click to expand...

The A-Line Express Bus is currently connected to the TH&B GO Centre, which includes all GO / Greyhound / Coach Canada Buses, as well as the few one-way GO Trains. It does little for A-Line ridership. I can't imagine West Harbour bringing in many more people to the Mountain. We will see when WestHarbour opens as the A-Line Express Bus will service it.

The main ridership for the current A-Line set-up seems to be from Mohawk & McMaster students traveling to/from each school and Downtown Hamilton/ McNab Transit Terminal.
 
WislaHD said:
Now that I am thinking it, why doesn't the A Line stub just extend south of the B line to Hamilton GO?
Click to expand...

I sincerely hope the City (of Hamilton) adopts the idea of having that A-Line spur run separately from the B-Line route, as more of a People Mover between TH&B - WestHarbour GO Stns.

I would also like to see that spur be a Fare-Free Zone.

I don't like the talk of a single-track People Mover LRT for the spur, I would much prefer two tracks with two trains. They would come ~ every 5-7 mins.
 
mdrejhon said:
It'll be an interesting discussion that will probably continue well into the 2020s when we debate where the next kilometer of Hamilton LRT should be most efficiently built.

While I believe B-Line is the ideal "starter LRT" for Hamilton due to the downtown, Mac, and GO stations, I agree now is not the time for a full-length A-Line and we might want to concentrate on a different route first. But that discussion feels half a generation away -- literally.

A-Line might not be useless by the 2040s -- By the 2030s, the demographics of the A-Line may have changed -- a full two decades from now. It's wholly possible the go-ahead occurs in the early 2030s, which means we might not have a fully-built A-Line until the early 2040s -- and only a few years later is the 2050s -- the middle of the century! By then, Hamilton Airport is a much more buzzing 'relief' airport for the GTHA, and medium-density and condo developments replace Walmart parking lots. That's almost a 1920s into 1960s jump -- from no TVs and mainly Model Ts, all the way to jet airplanes and the interstate freeway system.
Click to expand...

Sorry to say, but 'by then' Hamilton International and it's porta-terminal will be useless as the GTAA's Pickering Airport will have taken away any of HI's usefulness.

I can't ever fathom an A-Line LRT going anywhere south of Rymal, there is just no density and due to the way it's been developed in Mount Hope, no density will exist to warrant Light Rail investment.
Upper James, especially between Fennell-Rymal, has tons of infill potential (a-la North York City Centre big box-to-condos converts), but that's way off again maybe 2030s-2050s.
 
DC83 said:
I don't like the talk of a single-track People Mover LRT for the spur, I would much prefer two tracks with two trains. They would come ~ every 5-7 mins.
Click to expand...
A traffic-separated 1-lane LRT will produce much more frequent service than a traffic-integrated 2-lane LRT.

I would like 2 tracks too, but we will get faster A-Line LRT service if it is traffic separated, and the only way to do that without kicking cars/parking off James, would be to begin with a 1-lane LRT. Less opposition, less spending, and faster service.

We are really on the same page about ultimately wanting 2-lane LRT, but let's look at the traffic & political realities of James... A lot of people aren't ready for a pedestrian-only James Street (as much as I'd love that). As long as the James LRT only has one intermediate stop between King Street and West Harbour GO, it can make it one end to the other really quickly and cycle back-and-fourth twice in 15 minutes with a 7.5-minute cycle if it's traffic-separated and traffic-light-prioritized. We can still get 7 minute service with a single-lane A-Line LRT, and this will perform faster than 2 LRT lanes if we're forced to mix car traffic (see: How slow Toronto TTC King Streetcar is). But only if we have traffic separation and traffic light priority.

In other words... Do you prefer 1 (one) LRT lane or 0 (zero) LRT lanes on James :(

Realistically, politically, economically, and performance-wise, I'm For 1 lane LRT on James for faster traffic-separated service while keeping cars... Then 2 when A-Line is extended and Hamilton gets more comfortable with LRTs.
 
Last edited:
1-lane LRT on James could be faster than 2-lane LRT on James, because:

- If we put 2 lanes of LRT on James, then we'll be forced to put it in mixed traffic, slowing it down. Traffic separation isn't doable unless we lose the cars OR parking OR 2-way.
- If we put 1 lane of LRT on James, then we simultaneously gain efficient traffic separation & traffic light priority

Mathematically, to achieve 7 minute service with just 1 train on a 1.5km LRT, the LRT needs to go 3 kilometers per 7 minute cycle. In this situation, it only needs to achieve an average speed of 25 kilometers per hour including the stop dwells. This is actually a similar average speed to a good traffic-separated signal-priority LRT! So we can get your 5-7 minute range with just 1 bidirectional LRT going back and fourth, if it's designed properly. And we get to keep cars on James to satisfy the rest of the voters.

I am not opposed to 2-LRT-lanes on James Street. Heck, I'm okay if it's in mixed traffic (though car owners will complain until the cows come home, though -- like drivers on King Street in Toronto). But can Hamilton politics overcome the opposition, especially from concerned James businesses, and the Hamilton car-owner voters? And the pro-LRTs who may demand traffic separation and pedestrian mall unobtainium utopia ideas? Converting from 1-way to 2-way was a huge challenge politically, but kicking either cars or car parking away from James Street is probably not politically tenable given our Hamilton City Council.

For a successful 2017 city council approval of contract signings -- politically & economically, I think that 1 traffic-separated LRT lane on James Street (north of King St) is probably easier and better -- and if we need a 2nd lane, we could put it on Hughson (1 LRT lane on James, 1 LRT lane on Hughson). It could eventually become a loop that goes in front of the Hunter GO station, before becoming two LRT lanes on James heading up the mountain (i.e. ramp tunnel) in a future A-Line extension. Or we simply install a 2nd LRT lane upon the future A-Line extension in an era when Hamilton is more comfortable with LRTs.

There are some creative solutions like O-Train's where the tracks will double-up south of Wilson where James becomes wider. In this event, there's less of single track (Wilson to West Harbour), and we'd run two trains, with the northwards train waiting at the Jackson Square LRT stop (between King and Wilson) until the southwards train arrived, before proceeding to move north (With a positive train control system to block movement until the track was free). This solution could work if the LRT is extended 3 blocks south to the downtown GO station, with the money saved by single-tracking north of Wilson, as long as they can do 2 cycles every 15 minutes (7.5 minute service).
 
Last edited:
I prefer zero tracks on James as I think the 'spur' should go down a TransitWay-converted Hughson St (which would also act as the 'enhanced pedestrian pathway' the Premier mentioned --the City's hodgepodged McNab Pedestrian 'plan' is a joke!).
 
  • Like
Reactions: rbt
DC83 said:
the City's hodgepodged McNab Pedestrian 'plan' is a joke!).
Click to expand...
Not only that, the McNab bus terminal itself is a joke. The City really needs to look into acquiring that land adjacent to James street and build a proper bus terminal (ie: one with a large center platform). The current bus terminal really is inadequate.
 
DC83 said:
Sorry to say, but 'by then' Hamilton International and it's porta-terminal will be useless as the GTAA's Pickering Airport will have taken away any of HI's usefulness.
Click to expand...

The last study done by GTAA suggested that a Pickering Airport in its initial incarnation would only be the same size as Hamilton and Kitchener at capacity. The Pickering airport would have a catchment area east of Toronto. It wouldn't impact Hamilton numbers.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top